see keiths build thread because I sure as heck am not about to post dozens of links to prove what we've all already known since 1995

ok,
let me google that for you Dann
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+boost+creep

 

also see my buddy's fastivab25mr (or whatever his sn is) 300whp BP with stock rods that ejected them with ewg and only a can for boost control.
haven't seen much? tune more BP's

PS: my buddy's rods all ejected PAST peak torque. that should blow your mind

 

Reread what sav wrote, retard.

You failed at being a smartass.

 

You should probably post a link, because from where I'm sitting you sound like someone who doesn't actually understand the topic you're attempting to talk about.

e: This thread is basically a clusterfuck of nomenclature. Boost creep (boost rises with RPM, max boost at/near max power) doesn't put any additional stress on rods if it doesn't move the torque peak up. Uncontrolled creep is still not desirable because you can outrun the fuel injectors and it generally means the wastegate setup is pretty ****-poor. Boost overshoot (boost immediately rises beyond the desired level, max boost at/near max torque) is seriously undesirable in all cases and, by definition, is never induced on purpose. Most of you are talking about overshoot, but saying "creep". Dann is talking about creep as I've defined it.

Can we get back to talking about how kludgy exhaust restrictors are now?

 

i dont have time to teach you about inertia loads (tensile and compressive) and how the forces increase exponentially with rpms.

 

Are you back to being a complete and utter child and lashing out again?
Are you back to neg propping every single one of my posts again?

Is it that time of the month for you again?
That engine stress doesn't increase past peak load?

 

**** all your strawman semantics arguments. That includes you vlad.

this is what we are discussing:

and I'm the only one who's addressed his question and completely bogus statement and it pisses me off that you're wasting words talking about creep or overshoot or creep vs overshoot.

Nitro's theory is that peak torque on a dyno plot is the peak load of an engine's conponents, so he tunes his cars to increase boost after peak torque to keep the torque output flat to redline.

talk about that.

 

But bro, he's tuned so many cars.

..and set so many records

 

he would not comprehend how people bend rods by revving past 7k n/a

will not fit into brain

because literally nothing past peak load matters. nothing bro. nothing. no stress on the components, just run ALLOFIT on an upsidedown dyno and your stock rods are fine

 

So you're saying that 220ft.lbs of torque at 7000rpm is harder on an engine than 250ft.lbs of torque at 4000rpm? Or am I still confused?

 

in regards to tensile or total inertial loads, yes. total compression or power loads, no.

if you're inducing "creep" to maintain peak torque to redline, you're putting more load/stress on the rods the greater the rpm.

 

More tensile load/stress, yes, but not more than a stock motor can handle (unless you rev it past 7k, which nobody has suggested). The compression load is what the stock rods care about, and the peak compression load happens at peak torque.

IOW, if the motor copes with 230wtq at 4000rpm, is 210wtq at 7000rpm going to break it? I think not.

 

i dunno, i suppose. way to ruin it.

 

Considering the fact that no one here has lost props to me, and I'm 28 props down compared to this time yesterday, and the fact that you are still wrong, I'd say you are projecting.

Dann

 

I like you because you never let the truth get in the way of a good internet pissing match

 

My dad did always tell me: "never let the truth ruin a good story"

 

Nitro, Hang in there.

Vbad, ??//?????///???

2D: You need V clamp? I Make V clamp. A/O can do both.

Loads: Get a plot of chamber pressure vs crank angle. Multiply piston area times chamber pressure at every degree and plot. At each degree of crank angle, calc the inertial loads. Plot. Add the two loads together for every degree for a total load. Calc column buckling strength of the con rod. Take worst case compressive sum and adjust boost (reflecting pressure load) and rpm (inertial load) to stay below the column buckling load.

It appears nitro has figured this out, its just hard to get past the accent.

Subject for the next thread: In what month of the year do the Aussies drink the least amount of Tequila?

corky

 

Andrew r smart and understand physics.

In terms of compressive loads, 230wtq at 4000 vs 230wtq at 7000 is always going to be harder on the rods, because they have to endure that compressive load for nearly twice the amount of time.

 

While at 7000rpms, they have to endure the force direction change nearly twice the amount of times within a given period.

 

Of course!



I haven't really read up on loads in a quite a while--it's probably been over 10 years.

I was thinking that if you added boost to redline and since tensile load is a function of rpm^2 that the loads would significantly increase as you reach redline, compared to if you held it steady. But that was wrong because that extra boost doesn't really factor into those loads and any increase in boost is really just making up for the loss of combustion pressure due to the speed of the explosions relative to the crank angle and all that business.

Plus I really just wanted to argue about something.


it takes a brave/strong man to admit he was wrong--remember that.